|
Quizzes for a Street Preacher:
Statue Worship and Praying to the Virgin Mary
These are common questions asked by most non-catholics.
Select a question to view the proper response.
Whydo you Catholics worship Mary as a goddess?
Itwould be mortal sin for any Catholic to regard Mary as agoddess. If aCatholic expressed such a belief to a priest in Confession he would be refusedabsolution unless he promised to renounce such as an absurd idea. If you wishto attack Catholic doctrine, at least find out what Catholics do believe beforeyou begin. We Catholics do not giveworshipto Mary, the Mother ofChrist, but what we do give to her is the best that we can in the giving,namely,homage, veneration, reverence, but never worship. We have enoughintelligence to know that Mary the woman who gave human bone, human flesh, andhuman feature to the Savior of Mankind was not a goddess but a human member ofthe human race. Although she is a member of our race we hail her as the FirstLady of Heaven and of Earth.
Thegenealogies of Christ as given by the Gospel afford one much difficulty. IfJesus was not the son of Joseph, why is His genealogy traced through Joseph?
Jesuswas not the natural son of Joseph. But Mary, who was the Mother of Jesus, wasrelated to Joseph, whose genealogy was also her own. It was a Jewish custom torecord descent only through the male line.
Ifyou call her Queen of Heaven do you not do her an injustice in refusing to herthe title of goddess?
Itwould be the greatest possible injustice to regard her as a goddess. It is justto honor her even as God has honored her, which we Catholics do. Jesus is Kingof kings and Lord of lords, and His mother certainly possessesqueenly dignityholding the highest place in Heaven next to her Divine Son. But that does not,and cannot change her finite and created human nature. To regard her as agoddess would be absurd.
Yetyou insist that she is the Mother of God!
JesusChrist is true God and true man, and as He was born of Mary she is truly theMother of God. The Second Person of the Blessed Trinity was born of heraccording to the humanity He derived from her. She is not a goddess, for Goddid not take His Divine Being from her. But she is the Mother of God since theSecond Person of the Blessed Trinity was truly born of her in His human nature.
Howcould Mary be the mother of the One who created her?
Maryowed her being, of course, to God, but this under the aspect of His eternalnature. Subsequent to her creation that human nature was born of her which theSon of God had assumed to Himself. She was, therefore, the mother of Christ.But Christ was one Divine Person existing in two natures, oneeternalanddivine; the other,temporalandhuman.Mary necessarilygave birth to a being with one personality and that divine, and she is rightlycalled the Mother of God.
Doesnot the Catholic Church insist also upon the biologically impossible dogma ofthe Immaculate Conception of Mary herself?
Thedogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary has nothing to do with biology. Itdoes not mean that she was conceived miraculously in the physical sense. Shewas normally conceived and born of her parents, Joachim and Ann. But in hervery conception her soul waspreservedimmaculate in the sense that sheinherited no stain of original sin, derived from our first parents.
Accordingto Catholic doctrine the Sacrament of Baptism destroys original sin. Would yousay that Mary did not need Baptism?
Marydid not need Baptism insofar as that sacrament was instituted for thedestruction of original sin. She received that sacrament in order toparticipate in its other effects, and chiefly in order to receive the Christiancharacter which that sacrament impress upon the soul. Mary was not the only oneborn into this worldfree of original sin. Jeremias, the prophet, pickedout by God to preach penance to the Chosen People of God, was sanctified by theaction of God, whilst being carried in the womb of his mother so that when hewas born he was free of original sin. Jer. 1:5. St. John the Baptist waslikewise sanctified in the womb of his mother Elizabeth because he was pickedout by God to point out to mankind the Lamb of God, the Messiah, Luke 1:41.Jeremias and St. John were conceived in original sin but before birth werecleansed of original sin. Mary was never conceived in original sin and thus itis only by this privilege that she was neverunder the dominionof theevil spirit. It is only by the privilege of the Immaculate Conception that Marycan be the woman of whom God speaks in prophecy to Satan after the fall of thefirst parents, Adam and Eve, when He says to the serpent: "Because thou hastdone this.... I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and between thyseed and her seed; she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for herheel." Gen. 3:14-15.
IfMary was sinless she could not have needed redemption! Yet is not Christ theRedeemer of every child of Adam?
Insofaras the sin of Adam involved the whole human race in condemnation Mary neededredeeming. But there are two ways of redeeming. God could allow one to be bornin sin and then purify the soul bysubsequentapplication of the meritsof Christ, or He could, by ananticipationof the merits of Christ,exempt a soul from an actual contraction of original sin. Thus HeexemptedMary from any actual inheritance of the sin, and she owes her exemption to theanticipated merits of Christ. In other words, she was redeemed by Christ bypreventionrather than by subsequent purification.
Isthere any evidence in Scripture that Mary was indeed never actually subject tooriginal sin?
Yes.In Gen. 3:15, God said to Satan, "I will put enmities between thee and thewoman ... thou shalt lie in wait for her heel." The radical enmity betweenSatan and that second Eve, the Mother of Christ, forbids her having been underthe dominion of Satan, as she would have been had she ever contracted originalsin in actual fact. In Lk. 1:28, we read how the Angel was sent by God tosalute Mary with the words, "Hail, full of grace." Grace excludes sin, and hadthere been any sin at all in Mary she could not have been declared to befilledwith grace. The Protestant version translates the phrase as "thou thathast been highly favored." But the Greek certainly implies "completely filledwith holiness." However, complaints that our doctrine exempts Mary from thecontracting of original sin are becoming more and more rare in a world which istending to deny original sin altogether, and which wishes to exempt everybodyfrom it.
St.Paul says that one died for all, and therefore all were dead. 2 Cor. 5:14-15.
Suchtexts must be interpreted in the light of other passages where God reveals thatMary was never under the dominion of Satan. Mary is included in these words ofSt. Paul juridically insofar as she was born of Adam, but she was not allowedto be born in sin to be afterwards redeemed. She was redeemed by prevention.
St.John knew the Mother of Christ better than the others, yet he does not mentionher Immaculate Conception!
InRev. 12 he shows clearly his knowledge of the deadly opposition between Maryand Satan. His Gospel he wrote to supplement the Synoptic accounts, andsufficient details had been given concerning Mary herself by St. Luke. Omissionto mention a fact in a given book is not proof that the writer did not know ofit, and above all if it does not fall within the scope of his work.
Didthe early Church know anything of this doctrine?
St.Augustine, in the fourth century wrote: "When it is a matter of sin we mustexcept the holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I will have no question raised,owing to the honor due to our Lord." St. Ephrem, also in thefourthcentury,taught very clearly the Immaculate Conception of Mary, likening her to Evebefore the fall. The Oriental Churches celebrated the feast of the ImmaculateConception as early as theseventhcentury. When Pope Pius IX definedthe Catholic doctrine in 1854 he gave, not anew truthto be added toChristian teaching, but merely defined that this doctrine waspart of Christianteaching from the very beginning, and that it is to be believed by all as partof Christian revelation.
Yourinfallible Church allowed St. Bernard to remain in ignorance of this doctrine.
Sincethe Church had not then given any infallible definition on the subject St.Bernard naturally could not be guided by it. St. Bernard believed that Mary wasbornfree from sin, but he was puzzled as to themomentof hersanctification. He thought the probable explanation to be that she wasconceived in sin, but purified as was St. John the Baptist prior to her actualbirth. But he did not regard this opinion as part of his Faith. Meantime hiserror was immaterial prior to the final authentic decision of the infallibleChurch. St. Bernard believed all that God had taught and all that the CatholicChurch had clearly set forth in her definitions prior to his time.
Didnot St. Thomas Aquinas deny the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
Hisopinion was probably much the same as that of St. Bernard. Before thedefinitedecisionof the Church was given theologians were free to discuss thematter. But the Church has since defined that the soul of Mary was neversubject for a single moment to the stain of original sin. Both St. Bernard andSt. Thomas would have been very glad to have had the assistance of such adefinition.
Whydid the Church withhold that honor from Mary for so long a time?
SinceMary always possessed that honor the Church did not withhold it from her. Thedefinition that Mary did possess such an honor was given by the Church whennecessitydemandedit. There was no real dispute about this matter inthe early Church. In the middle ages theologians attempted a deeper analysis ofthe privileges of Mary, and with no infallible decision of the Church to helpthem, some theologians arrived at defective conclusions chiefly because of thedefective psychology of the times. Some theologians held that Mary waspreserved from original sin from the very moment of her conception; others saidfrom the moment of her animation; yet others that she was purified at a momentsubsequent both to her conception and to her animation. All admitted that shewas sanctified prior to her actual birth. Now that the Church has spoken thereis no doubt on the subject.
Didnot Franciscans and Dominicans attack each other bitterly over the ImmaculateConception?
Theyindulged in much controversy, but - it was a free matter for discussion untilthe Church had given her definite ruling. The Catholic Church demands unity indoctrines which have beendefinitely decided, liberty in matters stillundecided, and charity always. I admit that her ideals of charity have notalways been maintained by her wayward children in theological controversies,but that is no fault of the Church.
Didnot Philip III and Philip IV ask the Pope Paul V, Gregory V, and Alexander VIIto define the Immaculate Conception in order to stop the wrangling, the Popesreplying that the doctrine was not definable as not being in Scripture?
ThePopes havenevergiven such a decision. Paul V in 1617 forbade anyone toteachpubliclythat Mary was not immaculate. Gregory V in 1612 orderedthe discussion to stop until the Church should have given anofficial decision.Alexander VII said that the Immaculate Conception of Mary was thecommondoctrineof the Church and that no one must deny it. None of thesePopes gave a dogmatic definition, but rather adisciplinaryruling. PopePius IX. defined the doctrine finally in 1854.
Whycall Mary a virgin? Seeing that she was a mother. The linking of the two termsis an insult to reason.
Theassertion that an omnipotent God is limited by the natural laws, which HeHimself established, is an insult to reason. Jesus, the child of Mary, wasconceivedmiraculouslywithout the intervention of any human father, andwas born miraculously, Mary's virginity being preserved throughout. I do notclaim that any natural laws were responsible for this event. I claim that Godwas responsible, and the only way you can show that the doctrine is notreasonable is by proving that there is no God, or that He could not do whatCatholic doctrine asserts.
Wheredoes it say in Scripture that Mary was ever virgin?
Isaiahthe prophet (7:14) certainly predicted a supernatural and extraordinary birthof the Messiah when he wrote, "The Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold avirgin shall conceive and bear a son; and his name shall be called Emmanuel."St. Luke says, "The angel Gabriel was sent from God ... to a virgin ... and thevirgin's name was Mary." When Mary was offered the dignity of becoming themother of the Messiah, a privilege to which any Jewish maiden would ordinarilylook forward with eager desire, she urged against the prospect the fact thatshe had no intention of motherhood. "How shall this be done, becauseI know notman." She does not refer to the past, but by using the present tenseindicates her present and persevering intention. The angel assured her that herchild would be due to the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit, and that shewould not be asked to forfeit the virginity she prized so highly, and then onlydid she consent. Luke 1:26-38. When Jesus was born, Mary had none of thesuffering usually associated with childbirth. The child was born miraculously.Mary herself in no way incapacitated. She herself attended to her own needs andthose of the child. "She brought forth her first-born son, and wrapped him upin swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger." Lk. 2:7. The Virgin Birthmeans that Mary had at one and the same time the privilege of Motherhood andthe privilege of Maidenhood.
Didnot Mary, to cloak her own sin, persuade St. Joseph that her child was of theHoly Ghost?
No.That is absolutely false. Mary, saluted by an angel as full of grace, was thepurest and holiest woman who ever lived on this earth. And, as a matter offact, with sublime confidence in God, Mary refrained from explaining the eventto St. Joseph, leaving all to God. As St. Matthew Mt. I, 20, tells us, "Beholdthe angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying, 'Joseph, son ofDavid, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived inher is of the Holy Ghost.'" What you suggest has been said by certain peoplemerely because the Catholic ChurchhonorsMary. Their hatred of theCatholic Church is so great that they dislike all she loves, and are willing tooverlook any injury to Christ in fostering their hatred. Yet how can they hopeto please Christ bydishonoringHis mother? Every true child bitterlyresents disrespect to his mother, and Christ was the beat son who ever lived.The more we honor Mary the more we honor Christ, for the honor we show her isbecause of Christ. If He were not the central figure, Mary would have beenforgotten long ago.
IfJesus was born of a virgin why does he say nothing about it?
Wedo not know that He saidnothingabout it. The evangelists do not recordanyspecialutterances of Christ on this subject, but they do notpretend to recordallthat He ever said. St. Luke tells us that when Hemet the two disciples on the way to Emmaus, "beginning at Moms and all theprophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures, the things that wereconcerning him." 24:27. There is every probability that He explained His adventinto this world according to the prophecy of Isaiah. Meantime the Gospels dorecord the fact that Marywas a virgin, and their words are as reliablein this as when they record the utterances of Christ.
Toprove Davidic descent both Matthew and Luke give the Genealogy of Joseph,useless were not Joseph the father of Christ.
Thegenealogy of Joseph was that of Mary also. They were kinspeople of the sameDavidic stock. The Jews as a rule counted their generations only in themaleline, and such a generation alone would appeal to the Jews for whom Matthewabove all wrote. The same St. Matthew records that the angel told Joseph thatthe child was conceived miraculously by the Holy Ghost and not through theintervention of man. St. Luke in turn left no doubt as to his mind on thesubject when he carefully wrote that "Jesus Himself was beginning about the ageof thirty years; being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph." 3:23.
St.Matthew says that Joseph knew her not till she brought forth her first-bornson: 1:25.
Nordid he. And the expression "till" in Hebrew usage has no necessary reference tothe future. Thus in Gen. 8:7, we read that "the dove went forth from the arkand did not returntillthe waters dried up." That expression does notsuggest that it returned then. It did not return at all, having found restingplaces. Nor does the expression firstborn child imply that there were otherchildren afterwards. Thus Exodus says, "Every first-born shall be sanctifiedunto God." Parents had not to wait to see if other children were born beforethey could call the first their first-born!
Matt.13:55-56 says, "His brethren James and Joseph, and Simon and Jude: and hissisters, are they not all with us?"
TheJewish expression "brothers and sisters of the Lord" in Scripture merely referstorelationshipin the same tribe or stock. Cousins often came underthat title. In all nations the word brother has a wide significance, as whenone Mason will call another a brother Mason without suggesting that he was bornof the same mother. The same St. Matthew speaks explicitly of "Mary, the motherof James and Joseph" in 27:56, obviously alluding to a Mary who was not themother of Jesus but who was married to Cleophas, the brother of Joseph.
Therewould not he two girls in the one family called Mary.
Therecertainly could be. And St. John 19:25, writes that there stood by the cross ofJesus "His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas." But even here,Mary of Cleophas need not have been a sister in the first degree ofblood-relationship, but rather of the same lineage in more remote degrees ofeither consanguinity or affinity.
Whyare Protestants, who believe in Scripture, so convinced that Mary had otherchildren?
Theyare not inspired by love for Christ, or for the mother of Christ, or forScripture in their doctrine. Their main desire is to maintain a doctrinedifferingfrom that of the Catholic Church. But it is a position which is rapidly goingoutof fashion. Learned Protestant scholars today deny as emphatically asany Catholic that Mary had other children. When Our Lord, dying on the cross,commended His mother to the care of St. John, He did so precisely because Hewasher only child, and He knew that Mary had no other children to carefor her. The idea that Mary had other children isdisrespectfulto theHoly Spirit who claimed and sanctified her as His sanctuary. It insults Christ,who was the only-begotten of His mother even as He was the only-begotten of HisHeavenly Father. It insults Mary, who would have been guilty of a greatingratitudeto God, if she threw away the gift of virginity which God had so carefullypreserved for her in the conception of Christ. It insults St. Joseph. God hadtold him by an angel to take Mary to wife, and that the child to be born of herhadno earthly fatherbut was the very Son of God. God merely gave St.Joseph theprivilegeof protecting her good name amongst theundiscerning Jews, and He chose a God-fearing man who would respect her.Knowing that her child was God Himself in human form, Joseph would at onceregard her as on a planefar superiorto that of any ordinary humanbeing, and to him, as to us, the mere thought of her becoming a mother tomerely earthly children would have seemed a sacrilege.
Youurge these privileges granted to Mary as the foundation of your devotion toher, yet Christ said, "Rather blessed are they who hear the word of God andkeep it." Luke 11:28.
Wouldyou presume to say that Mary, whom the angel addressed as full of grace, didnot hear the Word of God and keep it? You have missed the sense of the passageto which you allude. In Luke 11:27, a woman praised the one who had the honorto be the mother of Christ. Christ did not for a moment deny it, as you wouldlike to believe. The sense of His words is simple, "Yes, she is blessed. Butbetter to hear God's word and keep it, thus attain holiness, than to be Mymother. You cannot all imitate Mary by being My mother; but you can do so byhearingGod's word andkeepingit." The thought that those who hear God's wordand keep it are rather blessed than Mary because she did not is simplyabsurd."Henceforth," declared Mary prophetically, "all generations shall call meblessed." Lk. 1:48. And Elizabeth saluted her with the words, "Blessed art thouamong women." Lk. 1:42.
Howdo you prove Mary's bodily assumption into Heaven?
NoChristian could dispute the fact that Mary's soul is in Heaven. Christcertainly did not suffer the soul of His own mother to be lost. The doctrine ofher bodily assumption after her death is not contained in Scripture, but isguaranteed bytraditionand by theteachingof the CatholicChurch. That Scripture omits to record the fact isno argument against it.Omission is not denial. Meantime, early traditions positively record the fact,and negatively we note that, whilst the mortal remains of a St. Peter and of aSt. Paul are jealously possessed and honored in Rome, no city or Christiancenter has ever claimed to possess the mortal remains of Our Lady. Certainlyrelics of Our Lady would be regarded as having greater value than those of anySaint or Apostle, so nearly was she related to Christ. And it was most fittingthat the body of Mary, who had been preserved even from the taint of originalsin, should not have been allowed to corrupt. After all, it was just as easyfor God to take her glorified body to Heavenat onceas it will be totake the glorified bodies of all the saved at the last day. However, thedefinite sanction of this doctrine by the Catholic Church is sufficientassurance of the fact.
Ihave discovered 27 virgin-born Saviors in my studies of mythology.
Youwould find it difficult to name them. However, granting that you have read ofsome such claims, a little further study would show you that a critical and,comparative examination such as Christian doctrine has had to undergo, leavesthese mythological claims devoid of reality, whilst the Christian fact emergesunscathed.
Atevening devotions in a Catholic Church I heard many prayers to Mary.Icannot find in Scripture where Mary is to be worshipped in the same way asChrist.
Iam not surprised, for such a doctrine is nowhere taught in Scripture. Moreoverif any Catholic dared to worship Mary in the same way as he worships Christ, hewould be guilty of a most serious sin, and no Catholic priest could give himabsolution unless he promised never to do so again. But that does not mean thatone must deprive Mary of all honor.
St.Bonaventure said, "Into thy hands, O Lady, I commend my spirit." Thus he servedthe creature more than the creator to whom alone such words should beaddressed.
St.Bonaventure did not serve the creature more than the Creator. In commending hissoul to Mary he was not commending it to anyone opposed to God. He did isbecause of God, who chose Mary as the second Eve. Eve brought us forth tomisery and to death; Mary brought us forth to happiness and to life when shebrought forth our Saviour. Like the kings from the East, St. Bonaventure knewthat after the long journey through this life, he would also find the childJesus with Mary, His mother, and that if he commended his soul to the mother hewould necessarily find himself in the presence of the child, even in eternity.Gladly on my own deathbed would I utter the words used by St. Bonaventure. AsJesus came to us through Mary, so we shall go to Him through her, whether wethink of it or not.
Maryis no different from your own mother.
Asthe street Arab replied to a similar objection. "But there's an immensedifference between the sons. My mother is the mother of me. Mary is the motherof God."
Youspeak as if Jesus looks on His mother just as you look on your mother.
Assurely as my mother is my mother, He knows that His mother is His mother; andHe treats her as such.
Jesuswas a good son but he recognized only one being, the omnipotent God.
Hadhe ignored Mary He would not have been a very good son, nor would He have hadmuch respect for God who said, "Honor thy father and thy mother." Christ was aperfect example of virtue in all things. And if He did not recognize Mary, whydid He go down to Nazareth and be subject to her? Why did he perform His firstmiracle at her request? And why did He make such special provision for her atthe moment of His death?
Whensomeone praised Mary, Christ paid no attention, but said that only those areblessed who keep the word of God. Lk. 11:28.
TheGospels are fragmentary accounts, and we do not know all that transpired onthat occasion. But even so, the actual text is not opposed in any way to thehonor we give to Mary. Someone praised Mary. Christ replied, "Yea, ratherblessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it." Not for a moment did Heintend to deny that Mary had done this. He practically says, "Yes. She is blestin being my mother. But it is a greater blessing to serve God." And, from onepoint of view, the fidelity with which Mary undoubtedly served God was agreater blessing to her than merely being the mother of Christ. Any idea thatChrist, the best of sons, was trying to belittle His mother is absurd. And ifyou have such faith in Scripture, what do you do as regards the prophecy ofMary in Lk. 1:48? "From henceforth," she predicted, "all generations shall callme blessed." Yet blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it! WeCatholics call Mary blessed indeed, whilst many Protestants search Scripture inthe fond hope of proving something to her discredit!
Christcalled her, "Woman," when he said, "Woman behold thy son." John 19:26.
Inthe language Christ spoke, that word was a term ofgreat respecthoweverharshly it may sound in our modern English language. Our Lord would have beenthe last to slight His mother, a thing we despise in every man; and above allin His last and most tender words to her. Nor are we likely to please Him byseeking to dishonor her.
DidHe not say to her at the marriage feast of Cana, "Woman, what is that to theeand to Me?" John 2:4.
Hedid. But most certainly He intended no reproach to Mary. Her action was one ofpure charity to others. Foreseeing the possible distress of others, she askedHim to relieve them; and He would not rebuke so unselfish a thought. Nor wouldHe speak to her with any trace of disrespect. Then, too, had Mary asked a wrongthing, Christ would not have done it, nor would He have sanctioned a request Hehad to rebuke. And Mary knew that she had not been reprehended, or she wouldnot have told the waiters to do what her Son would tell them. She would havedropped the matter. Why, then, did Christ speak thus? It was His first miracle,the first public sign of His divinity wrought by Himself. And He wanted tobring out publicly the fact that He was doing it, not as the son of an earthlymother and according to His human nature, but calling upon His divine nature asthe eternal Son of God. He did it because His mother requested it, but He didnot do it by any power derived from His mother. He thus brought out both forthe listeners and for us that this beginning of miracles was proof of Hisdivinity, although in appearance He seemed but man.
Whydo you call Mary Queen of Heaven?
BecauseMary is undoubtedly in Heaven, and Jesus is King of Heaven. Since Jesus is"King of kings and Lord of lords," it is certain that Mary His mother rejoicesin queenly dignity.
Whypray to Mary at all?
BecauseGod wills that we should do so, and because such prayers to her are of theutmostvalue. God often wills to give certain favors only on condition that wego to somesecondaryagent. Sodom was to be spared through theintercessionof Abraham; Gen. 18:20-33. Naaman, the leper, was to be cured only through thewaters of the Jordan, 4 Kings 5:9-14. Now Mary is, and must ever remain, theMother of Christ. She still has a mother's rights and privileges, and is ableto obtain for us many graces. But let us view things reasonably. If I desire topray, I can certainly pray to Goddirectly. Yet would you blame me if,at times, I were toask my ownearthly mother to pray for me also? Sucha request is really a prayer to her that she may intercede for me with God.Certainly, if I met the mother of Christ on earth, I would ask her to pray forme, and she would do so. And in her more perfect state with Christ in Heavenshe ismore ableto help me.
Buta prayer to God directly must be more efficacious than a prayer to Mary.
Notnecessarily. It might well be that God intends to honor Our Lady by grantingthe favor I seek through her intercession in a particular way. In that case thegrace is to be given through her provided I honor her by addressing myself toher. Again, every prayer to Mary is in reality the asking of a favor also. Itis often better to ask God for a favor and to have someone else praying to Godwith one for the same favor. Two prayers are better than one. And above all,when the other one praying is Christ's own mother.
Godloves you more than Mary loves you.
Thatis so. But He loves Mary more than He loves me. And as she is more pleasing toGod than I am, He will be more ready to grant her requests.
Itis unscriptural to attribute power to Mary.
Thatis a very unscriptural statement. At His mother's request Jesus changed waterinto wine at Cana, though He had said, "My time is not yet come." John 2:4. St.James tells us that "the prayer of a just man availeth much." Ja. 5:16. Howmuch more the prayer of Mary!
Doesthe Bible sanction such prayers to Mary?
Yes.All through the Bible you will find God conferring favors through the prayer ofothers. In the Old Testament we read of the prayers of Abraham, Moses, and ofthe various prophets. In the New Testament, St. James 5:16, tells us to "prayfor one another," in the text I have just quoted. If we must always praydirectly to God and may not ask the prayers of others why did St. Paul write tothe Thessalonians, "Pray for us that we may be delivered from importunate andevil men"? 2 Thess. 3:2. Why did he not ask directly of God, instead of askingthe prayers of the Thessalonians? Or would you be more scriptural than the NewTestament itself?
Thereis but one mediator, - there is no place for Mary.
Christis the principal mediator in His own right, Mary is a secondary mediatrix,through, with, and in Christ. Without Him she would have no power, andtherefore He is the source of all mediation with God on behalf of men.
Howcan you blend the mediation of others with that of Christ?
Itfollows from the doctrine of the Communion of Saints. Remember that, byBaptism, every Christian is incorporated with Christ. St. Paul says, "Christ isthe head; ye are the members." 1 Cor. 11:3; 12:27. So close is this union thatChrist says, "Whoever gives you to drink a cup of water in my name because youbelong to Christ; amen, I say to you, he shall not lose his reward." Mk. 9:40.Every Christian is Christ in a most intimate way. St. Paul tells us that if abaptized person sins, he takes the members of Christ and makes them the membersof iniquity! When that same St. Paul was persecuting the Christians before hisconversion, Christ appeared to him and said, "Saul, Saul, why persecutest ThouMe?"Acts 9:4. He did not say, "Why persecutest thou My disciples?" He could equallysay, when we pray to Mary or to the saints, "What asketh thou of Me?" When wehonor Our Lady or the saints, we honor, not their own merely human and creatednature, but we honor Christ in them according to the doctrines of Scripture.The Catholic Church is the only completely scriptural Church.
DoCatholics believe that Mary is omnipotent?
No.God alone is omnipotent. But through Mary we have access to the omnipotence ofGod.
Howdo you know that Mary hears you?
TheCatholic Church guarantees that, and she is here to tell us the truth aboutsuch things in the name of Christ and with His authority. Reason also assuresus that, as she could know our prayers in this life and pray for us in turn, soshe can do so in the more perfect state in Heaven. Finally, experience provesit, for she has manifested her power in thousands of concrete instances inanswer to prayer.
Whyshould Mary be recognized as being greater than any other woman?
Shewas picked out by God to be the sacred repository of God's own Son, to furnish,so to speak, the human texture, flesh, and blood from which was to be woven thegarb of divinity. If before birth we could have theprivilege of choosingour own natural mother, and if we ever had the power of making that motherwhatever we chose, would we ever make her short of anything but the loveliestlady in the world, or would we ever have endowed her with those qualities whichwould make us apologize to men either for moral blemishes or physicalweaknesses? No. I think we would give to her the qualities and virtues whichwould make all men love her eternally. If you and I then, ... with our naturalnatures would have done all this to the woman who gave us life, who meant somuch to us, should we not suppose that God would do the same and more for theMother of His Son? This he did do. He arrayed her in the peerless jewel ofDivine Grace, a grace that was higher than any grace given to any mint, angel,or archangel. Angels were created to serve God. Mary was created to be theMother, the shrine, the tabernacle of God-made Man. Mary is to be honored aboveall women as the prophecies of the Old Testament declare, precisely because ofthe royal role she plays as Co-Redemptrix with Christ in the Divine Redemption.
Idon't see the necessity of hailing her as the Co-Redemptrix with Christ.
Seethen what is happening to the non-Catholic world for denying that role of Mary.In Catholicism, they tell us, there is too much emphasis and thewrongemphasison the Mother of Jesus. If we ever begin a religion byeliminatingtheMother, we shall eventually wind up byeliminatingthe Son. Thus whenthe Reformers did away with the Mother, they paved the way for doing away withthe Son. If we get rid of the one, we will soon get rid of the other. Germanybegan by putting the Mother in the tomb of oblivion or on the dusty pages ofhistory and after four hundred years Germany is now trying to get rid of theSon. If we can judge correctly the attitude of the American Federation ofChurches, our Blessed Savior is being rapidly brought down to the mere statusof a man. We can reasonably be suspicious that religions that have taken Maryout, have slurred this wonderful lady, and when we insult the Mother we insultthe Son. We can never have a Son without a Mother in the natural order ofthings; in the Divine order of things we can never have a Christ without aMary. If we smash her statues and white-wash Our Lady's Chapel or chisel theChild from the Mother, we run the risk of smashing the entire statue ofChristianity, for those two holy heads of Jesus and Mary are too close togetherfor their halos not to mingle and to cross.
Attendinga Catholic Church one evening I was disgusted by the rigmarole called theRosary. What in the Rosary?
TheRosary is a special form ofdevotion to Mary. One takes a set of beads,divided into five sections, each section consisting of one large bead and tensmall beads. Holding the large bead, one says the Our Father, and on each ofthe small ones, the Hail Mary. Between each section or decade the Gloria issaid. Whilst saying the prayers, one meditates or thinks of the joys, orsorrows, or glories of Christ's life and of that of His Mother. It is a verybeautiful form of prayer with which you were disgusted merely because you didnot understand it. The Rosary is a Bible for theBlindand theunlearned.In the so-called Dark Ages which were indeed the Ages of Faith, the Churchtaught the great masses, who could not read, the mysteries of the Bible throughthe meditations of the Rosary.
TheRosary is a relic of the superstitious Middle Ages, when it was meant forignorant people.
Theuse of beads dates from the earliest centuries. The prayers embodied in theRosary were composed by Christ Himself in the case of the Our Father and by theAngel Gabriel, St. Elizabeth, and the Council of Ephesus in the 5th century, inthe case of the Hail Mary. We are in very good company with those prayers. As adevotion, with its loving contemplation of the mysteries of the life, death andresurrection of Our Lord it appeals to rich and poor, to learned and ignorantalike, as Christianity itself was meant to do.
Whenwere beads invented, and what do they symbolize?
Itis impossible to say when beads were first used. As an aid to memory, the earlyChristians used to put a number of pebbles in one pocket, transferring them toanother as they said each prayer, so that they could be sure of completing suchprayers each day as their devotion inspired. Later, berries or pebbles werestrung together for the purpose. In the Middle Ages sections of these beadswere adapted to the different meditations which compose the Rosary, thesections being a numerical help to meditate for a given period of time uponeach allotted subject. The symbolism is expressed in the word Rosary. A Rosaryis a garland of flowers. One rose does not make a Rosary. Prayers are theflowers of the spiritual life, and in offering that group of prayers, known asthe Rosary, we lay a garland of spiritual flowers at the feet of God.
Christdid not have a Crucifix or Rosary beads.
Hemade the first Crucifix. That He did not use Rosary beads does not affect thequestion. He never had acopyof the New Testament in His hands, yet youdo notrejectthe New Testament because of that!
Betweeneach Our Father to God, it throws in ten prayers to Mary!
You'vegot it the wrong way 'round. Between each ten Hail Marys an Our Father is said.The Rosary is essentially a devotion to Mary, honoring her whom God Himself sohonored. And it honors her particularly in her relation to Christ, whose lifeis the subject of the meditations. The Our Father abstracts from theIncarnation of Christ; the Hail Mary is full of reverence to Our Lord in Hisbirth into this world for us.
Wouldnot the Rosary be just as efficient if said with one Our Father, one Hail Mary,and one Gloria?
Itwould not be the Rosary then, but some other type of devotion. Nor would such adevotion be as efficient, for meditation whilst saying ten Hail Marys is betterthan meditation whilst saying one. But your trouble seems to be based on themere question of number. That is quite immaterial.
Itis not. Christ said, "Use not vain repetitions as do the heathen, who think intheir much speaking to be heard." St. Mt. 6:7.
Vainrepetition in the manner of heathens is forbidden, but notusefulrepetitionwhich is not in the manner of heathens. Vain repetition relies mechanicallyupon the mere number of prayers or formulas uttered. But Catholics do not relyon the mere repetition of prayers, nor upon their multiplication, but on theintrinsicworthof each prayer and upon the fervor and earnestness with which itis said. Two prayers said well, one immediately after the other, are as good asthe same two prayers said well with twenty-four hours between them. Time isnothing to God, in whose sight 1,000 years are but as a day. He does not mindwhether there be two seconds between our prayers or two years; the prayersthemselves are just as pleasing to Him. If you take the principle behind yourobjection, and push it to its full conclusion, you could say the Our Father butonce in your life. If you said it once each year, it would be repetition. Howoften may you say it? Once a month? Once a week? Once a day? If daily, whatwould be wrong with saying it hourly? If you have just concluded one OurFather, why may you not begin it again at once? Does it suddenly become an evilprayer?
YourBible has a faulty translation of these words, "Use not vain repetitions as theheathens do." The Greek verb "battologein" of the original does not mean such athing at all. The Douay version translates correctly when it says,"speak notmuch."St. Mt. wantedactionand lesstalk.
Ifrepetition adds to effectiveness, why stop at ten Hail Marys? Why not more?
Itis the nature of this devotion that the Rosary should be composed of decades,or groups of ten. It would not be the Rosary otherwise. Repetition certainlyadds to effectiveness, if the prayers are said well. Just before His passion,Christ prayed "thethird time, saying the self-same word." Mt. 26:44. Hethought it good to say the same prayer three times in succession. Why did Helimit it to three times? If good to say it three times, why not twenty times?He thought three sufficient for His purpose. So, too, we consider the periodtaken by the recital of ten Hail Marys sufficient time for the amount ofreflection we desire to give to each mystery of the Rosary.
Doesnot Scripture advise short prayer rather than long rosaries?
No.Long hypocritical prayers are condemned. Prayer may be prolonged, but it mustnot be hypocritical, mechanical, or insincere. Christ spoke a parable to themthat, "We ought always to pray, and not to faint." Lk. 18:1. He Himself "wentout into a mountain to pray, and He passed the whole night in prayer to God."Lk. 6:12. "We cease not to pray for you," wrote St. Paul to the Colossians 1:9."Night and day we more abundantly pray for you," he wrote to the Thessalonians1 Thess. 3:10.
Anywayshort mental prayers must be better than long distracted prayers.
Shortfervent interior prayers are better than long distracted vocal prayers. But,given equally fervent prayers said with due attention, long ones are betterthan short ones. It is certainly better to give more time to prayer than less!And if distractions do present themselves, it is better to give up thedistractions than to give up the prayers. Mental prayer is good, but vocalprayer is equally good if said well, and sometimes better. Thus Christ taughtthe Apostles a vocal prayer called the Our Father. So well did they learn it byheart that they were able to write it down years later word for word.
Whydo you omit from the Our Father the words "For Thine is the Kingdom, the Power,and the Glory forever and ever"?
BecauseOur Lord did not add those words to the prayer as He taught it. There isnothing wrong with the words in themselves. In fact, they are very beautiful.But they are not Sacred Scripture. Some early Catholic copyist wrote thosewords in a margin; later copyist mistakenly transcribed them into the text; andthe Protestant translators made use of a copy of the New Testament with thewords thus included. All scholars today admit the words to be an interpolation.We Catholics do not use them.
Whydo Catholic Churches ring bells at daybreak, noon, and sunset?
Theringing of these bells is to remind Catholics to say the Angelus, a shortdevotion in honor of the incarnation of Christ. Three rings are given threetimes separately, and then nine rings, according to an ancient custom. Thedevotion is called the Angelus because the first words of the prayers to besaid begin as follows: "The Angel of the Lord declared unto Mary." The Angelus,therefore, reminds us of the message of the Angel Gabriel who brought the goodnews of the birth of Jesus Christ. And Catholics are asked to begin the day byremembering this great benefit; to recollect it again at noon, and at sunset orthe close of the day. An old English manuscript, written of course in England'sCatholic days before the Reformation, says that the Angelus in the morningshould remind us of Christ's resurrection at dawn; at noon of His death on thecross; and at eventide of His birth at midnight in the cave in Bethlehem. Inany case, the Angelus is to remind Catholics of the fact that the Son of Godcame into this world for the redemption of mankind, and that they themselvesshould never forget it.
Whatdo the three threes, and the nine bells signify?
Theorigin of the number of bells to be tolled is uncertain. The triple ringingreminds us of the Most Holy Trinity. The final nine bells may have beenarranged merely for the sake of harmony and symmetry, although some writers seein that number a reminder of the nine choirs of Angels who invite us to adoreGod with them.
|